A New Look At "Arachnia" and the Domain of Fear

[Konig Des Todes]

Do note: The forgotten were summoned to Tyria. But what are their origins prior to being summoned? They could of been created by the gods, or the mists, or something else - or just haved naturally evolved.

[Tim Paradox]

That is easily the case in reality, but not easily the case in GW. Although we're finding out that the Six Gods/Human Gods are not as powerful as once seemed through human legends, they are still more powerful than anything else.

For one, their power can turn seas into deserts (Crystal Desert) and poison lands (the Desolation). They can grant magic to the races of Tyria (this is still undisputed) and limit the use of magic for everyone else (bloodstones). There's still nothing to imply the gods didn't create humanity or the Forgotten, or even other races that are not stated to have existed prior to the humans/gods arrival on Tyria (races known being charr, dwarves, seers, mursaat, Elder Dragons, and giganticus lupicus - as to the arrival on Tyria, that's all we have for their origins, but tell me does the use of "Tyria" mean the world or the continent? It could very well mean the continent meaning that humanity originated from Tyria the world and not from some other world, though Bahltek implies otherwise - same goes for the gods).

If you can provide information for a group of beings who have created races (and I don't mean twisting things into mindless creatures like the Elder Dragons), or have transformed creatures from one thing to another (humans->demons; humans->plants is what the gods have done), then I'll be further inclined to think the Six Gods are not gods.

Until disproven, they are - to think otherwise is speculation. That's how I see it.

There's nothing to prove or disprove. "Gods" is a meaningless word you still failed to define. Does having awesome power mean you suddenly become a God? Then I am a God and ants are my subordinates. Does "God" mean you can create a lifeform? In that case I know many creatures, real and fictional, that classify as "gods".

What I'm saying is that "gods" is just a word. It has no meaning whatsoever. Definitely not in the GW world, where the so called gods aren't even the oldest or most powerful beings around... Anyway, I won't be getting into an endless war about semantics, so I rest my case.

[seamussheridan]

There's nothing to prove or disprove. "Gods" is a meaningless word you still failed to define. Does having awesome power mean you suddenly become a God? Then I am a God and ants are my subordinates. Does "God" mean you can create a lifeform? In that case I know many creatures, real and fictional, that classify as "gods".

What I'm saying is that "gods" is just a word. It has no meaning whatsoever. Definitely not in the GW world, where the so called gods aren't even the oldest or most powerful beings around... Anyway, I won't be getting into an endless war about semantics, so I rest my case.

wow. This is probably the dumbest thing I have ever read in my entire life. Good Job!!!

next you will be trying to redefine words like,"is"...

[Rob Van Der Sloot]

This is a very interesting topic. To me it almost seems like perhaps "knowledge" itself was divided amongst several insectoid Gods (Fear being one of them), but it got merged into general secrets under Abaddon. Maybe the various areas of the Realm of Torment (and their locks) shows us what the other areas of knowledge used to be?

I don't see enough reason to assume that Dhuum is insectoid, because we can fight Dhuum, and he clearly doesn't look insectoid at all.

[Tim Paradox]

wow. This is probably the dumbest thing I have ever read in my entire life. Good Job!!!

next you will be trying to redefine words like,"is"...

And your actual argument is what exactly? Your insults don't really impress me, mate.

[BrettM]

wow. This is probably the dumbest thing I have ever read in my entire life. Good Job!!!

He has an entirely valid point, which I don't find "dumb" at all.

Different cultures define "gods" in different ways. For example, in monotheistic belief systems the god is generally credited with universal creative powers, while this is not necessarily true in pantheistic belief systems, in which it is possible that none of the gods have such power. Coming up with a universal definition of the characteristics that are necessary and sufficient to consider a being a "god" is difficult. (And an atheist might deny that ANY characteristics are sufficient.)

In Tyria we have a terminology problem that is bound to result in semantic confusion. We can speak of dragons, or titans, or mursaat, or any other extremely powerful group of beings independently of the question of whether or not they also qualify as "gods". But we have no other word than "gods" to describe one set of powerful beings and their predecessors, as they have no single race or other characteristic in common. So any discussion of them always conflates questions of their nature with the question of their divinity.

Look at Abaddon, for example, who is often called a "false god". Yet, in what sense is he false? He has as much power as any of the other human gods. He was once as deserving (or undeserving) of worship as the others. So Abaddon is certainly not a false god in the sense that the titans or mursaat are false gods. We are using the same term to describe two very different things. Semantic confusion because we are lacking in definitions of godhood and alternate terms for referencing the beings independently of their godhood.

Such difficulties can make debates on the subject rather fruitless, since we all end up talking past each other without even realizing it.

[Konig Des Todes]

Tim does indeed have a valid point, but it seems like he/she/it is making relations of reality into the game. I would, for one, agree fully that in reality "god" is just a title - usually added onto icons or imaginary beings. In Tyria, however, this isn't the case - or should I say, it isn't proven to be the case.

We have nothing except the lack of evidence to indicate that the Six Gods/Human Gods/Old Gods/True Gods/Tyrian Gods (whatever term you wish to use) are merely powerful beings that take a title, that are not actual "gods" - but then what would make a god? Couldn't a god merely be a powerful being? One more powerful than mursaat and titans, destroyers or very old skale which is nothing more than just that - an old powerful skale that is worshiped?

However, I can never take the lack of evidence being evidence in itself. We know far too little to say "the gods are not actual gods" - both too little in what makes an actual god, if there is one, in the Guild Wars universe (what makes a god in this fictional universe doesn't have to be the same as to reality, which nowadays seems to be greatly confused with "omnipotent, omniscience, omni-everything" which isn't the case (see any folklore as to why)) and too little on what the six are.

[Tim Paradox]

Tim does indeed have a valid point, but it seems like he/she/it is making relations of reality into the game. I would, for one, agree fully that in reality "god" is just a title - usually added onto icons or imaginary beings. In Tyria, however, this isn't the case - or should I say, it isn't proven to be the case.

In Tyria, "gods" is a title given to a real group of powerful beings. That's it. The difference between the real world and this one is, that for instance in Christianity "God" is Almighty, He is the first (existed before the world or universe did), cannot be supplanted or defeated, is eternal, and created humanity/earth. Tyrian "gods" have none of these properties.

I think we all know it's just a matter of semantics =p peace

[BrettM]

Tyrian "gods" have none of these properties.

Neither do many gods in religions found in our world. Some of those religions are now considered mythologies, but some are still practiced. Some religions do not really deal with the origins question, and the gods, while powerful, are not all-powerful. (Shinto, for example, has the gods creating the isle of Japan, but I don't think the creation of the planet or universe is explained.) So the properties of the christian god are not a necessary part of the definition, except to christians.